Flake

Imagine this scene, a 42" touch sensitive screen inside a Police van during a riot, the operator touches the screen at a trouble spot and there's an image capture of a trouble maker captured. Or perhaps at a sports event where the camera is set back far enough to see the whole field of play, touch the screen and an image is taken.

You might say this is not photography, but these are the applications envisaged for such high MP sensors. In addition people say what build a racing car that will go so fast, well those developments find their way into theh everyday consumer applications. I'm happy that Canon are spending money pushing technology to its limits, I bought into a system and it's nice to know that to some extent it's going to be some what 'future proof'.

Logged

richy

I guess the same folks who bought that 50mp sensor that canon made but never sold to the public, the spooks and banks will have had some. 120mp sensors would be awesome in a bank \ reserve security application

oalali

a tweaked version of canon's 21 MP sensor.dual digic IV (or V).5-7 frames per secondCanon 1ds autofocus system . (to set it apart from the current 1d bodies)same form factor and weather sealing as the current model.

Why don't you just buy a 1Ds MkIII then?

Because:1) 1Ds is three years old and still manages to cost an arm or leg to buy.2) it is bulky & doesnâ€™t have a video function.3) putting the MP count a side, Nikon Managed to do so with their D700. So I donâ€™t think that it will cost Canon anymore to do it.4) if Iâ€™m going to wish then Iâ€™m going to wish for what I want and not what think Canon will release.

I don't feel it should be that difficult! seriously! If you change the APS-C sensor for a FF sensor and charge 1000$ more that should really be easy to do.

I dont use ISO above 3200 in 90% of the situations so I seriously don't care about ISO12800 being the "best" etc I just want super IQ at low ISOs in a FF body.

Hell, if they just put the existing 5DII sensor, tweak it a bit to shut up all the banding claims and put it in the same 7D body I'll be happy.

It is much more difficult than you realise! The sensor is so significantly larger that the casre has to be completely redesigned to accommodate the shutter & mirror mechanism, then there's the pentaprism which is also significantly larger. Plus another issue which doesn't seem to get much discussion and that is the flatness & alignment of the FF sensor & the 5D MkII has had more than a few issues with miss aligned sensors. Because thes FF unit is so much larger it suffers dissproportionately from miss alignment in both the vertical & more in the horizontal axis, but it also suffers from warping & rippling, caused by the heating & cooling of the silicon wafers in the manufacturing process. One company has calimed that it can produce sensors which are perfectly aligned (can't remember who though!)

ISO 12800 is not a real Iso, it is a sofware one where the camera uses Iso 6400 increases the S___ter speed and then drags the exposure back by software. High Iso performance is desireable in a digital camera, because dynamic range is the difference between clipping & the noise floor, hence there is a higher dynamic range on a High Iso performing camera.

So no chance of putting it into a 7D body, it's not much larger anyway!

I don't think what I said has to mean EXACT same body.. by body you mean specs, sealing, AF, etc.So what if they need to make it slightly bigger to accommodate the FF sensor? Remember the price difference between both cameras -on release- is about 1000$. I'm not a sensor engineer but I really believe 1000$ more can pay for the different in sensor size and extra adjustments to body size this might need.

And don't you think everybody who uses a dSLR by now know's that 12800 is not a real ISO, I don't understand what does this has to do with anything. And also, it's not CURRENTLY a real ISO, it will be real soon in future cameras like the 6400 has become compared to older cameras.

About Sensor miss-alignment, I honestly dont know any information about this, but this also has nothing to do with putting a FF sensor in a 7D (like) body, since it's in the manufacturing process of the sensor, not the body!

Anyways, to make what I meant by my original post more obvious:

I just wish the 5DIII to have all the specs of the 7D in addition to a tweaked FF sensor in the same range od 21 mpix, and I'm illing to pay 2600-2700 USD for it on release

richy

4) if Iâ€™m going to wish then Iâ€™m going to wish for what I want and not what think Canon will release.

ohhh okies that sounds like fun. I'll go for a 6x7 40mp sensor with anti dust and some IS lenses to go with it.Nothing too stupid, just a decent landscape \ portrait camera. 1-2fps would be fine. 7d af a must

canon rumors FORUM

davidpeter

It has been discussed here earlier, so please allow me to have a few words in connection with D700 vs 5DmkII.

I shoot low light events (weddings, sports such as martial arts, basketball and hockey, concerts) and let me say: the non-1 series bodies of Canon are far behind Nikon. I tried the 7D and the 5D mark II, but sold all my canon gear for a Nikon D700 and some lenses (70-200 f2.8 VR, 24-70 f2.8 instead of the same Canons). I could not be happier. It just works!

I think Canon is on the wrong way with the increasing MP count and with the decreasing features...

Logged

L-Fletcher

Indeed, it is a tad annoying that Canon feels it necessary to raise the resolution for each newly-released body, but the 5D MK II does excel in the studio. That said, it also holds up well for landscape/fine art/weddings/events in general - it handles noise well, considering that it has less than 3 million pixels off twice that of the D700 (said in a confusing way ).

Indeed, it is a tad annoying that Canon feels it necessary to raise the resolution for each newly-released body, but the 5D MK II does excel in the studio. That said, it also holds up well for landscape/fine art/weddings/events in general - it handles noise well, considering that it has less than 3 million pixels off twice that of the D700 (said in a confusing way ).

If Canon doesn't raise the MP count then their competitors will (c.f. Song A900, Nikon D3x).

Just guessing, but I suspect that there are very good market reasons behind them doing it.

davidpeter

Yep, I mean underperforming. For example auto focus. The AF of th 5D series is simply insufficient for sports and barely usable on low light concerts. I tried, I failed. Perhaps it is my fault, perhaps not, bit facts are simple: the D700 just works. I prefer the Nikon ergonomics too, especially the flash control, the AF switch button and the programmable auto ISO. They are awesome!

I never needed the 20+ MP count. The one and only feature I miss is the beautiful video. I need nothing but my stills for my job, but I enjoyed playing with the video. Both the 5 and the 7 could do that fine.

However, throwing away them and start a new life worth that cost.

Logged

richy

Its just a choive. The 5d2 af is good but not excellent. The d700 lacks the res for large prints. Just pick which one suits you Saying the 5d2 af doesnt work in low light is like saying a ferrari isnt great for hauling cement, really ?? The 5d2 is a budget portrait \ landscape camera and in that context it rocks, the 7d is a budget sports camera and rocks, the d700 is a budget all rounder and again it rocks but it isn't perfect and as someone else pointed out the 5d2 has nearly twice the pixel count. They already made a 5d2 with great af, the 1ds3 Its great canon and nikon took different approaches as you can have a choice.